Skip to content
All library documents

Why the Brownian Exponential Process Is a Martingale

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Nav89

Summary

The document explains why an exponential process built from Brownian motion and a compensating time term is a martingale. The key step is to split Brownian motion at the conditioning time into its known current value and its independent future increment. The current value is measurable with respect to the information available then, so it can be taken outside the conditional expectation; independence reduces the remaining conditional expectation to an ordinary expectation.

The future increment is normally distributed, and its exponential moment cancels the deterministic time adjustment. This establishes that the conditional expectation of the later process equals its current value. The discussion gives an algebraic argument rather than integrating the normal density directly. It concerns standard Brownian motion and its natural filtration; the stated reasoning relies on independent increments and the normal exponential-moment formula, so extensions to other processes require checking those assumptions.

Key ideas

  • Condition on the information available at the earlier time and separate the known Brownian value from its future increment.
  • Brownian increments are independent of the past and normally distributed.
  • The exponential moment of the future increment cancels the deterministic time adjustment.
  • The argument establishes the martingale property under the Brownian motion's natural filtration.

Tags

Full text
# Steven Shreve: Stochastic Calculus and Finance


# Steven Shreve: Stochastic Calculus and Finance












The lecture notes have the following theorem:

Let $\theta\in \mathbb{R}$ be given and $B(t)$ stands for the Brownian motion which is a martingale, then $Z(t)=exp\{-\theta B(t)-\dfrac{1}{2}\theta^2t\}$ is also a martingale.

$\underline{proof:}$ Let $0\leq s\leq t$ be given. Then $$\mathbb{E}[Z(t)|\mathbb{F}(s)]=\mathbb{E}[exp\{-\theta (B(t)-B(s)) -B(s) -\dfrac{1}{2}\theta^2((t-s)+s)\}|\mathbb{F}(s)]\Rightarrow \\ \mathbb{E}[Z(t)|\mathbb{F}(s)]=Z(s)\mathbb{E}[exp\{-\theta (B(t)-B(s)) -\dfrac{1}{2}\theta^2(t-s)\}|\mathbb{F}(s)]\Rightarrow \\ \mathbb{E}[Z(t)|\mathbb{F}(s)]=Z(s)exp\{\dfrac{1}{2}(-\theta)^2\mathbb{Var}(B(t)-B(s))-\dfrac{1}{2}\theta^2(t-s)\}=Z(s)$$ where $X=B(t)-B(s)\sim N(0,t-s)$. My question is how can you proove this part $\mathbb{E}[Z(t)|\mathbb{F}(s)]=Z(s)exp\{\dfrac{1}{2}(-\theta)^2\mathbb{Var}(B(t)-B(s))-\dfrac{1}{2}\theta^2(t-s)\}$ analytically by using the normal pdf. I am missing something in my effort to proove this part, because no textbook from those that I have does it analytically.

## Answer by Kevin (score 6, accepted)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/50788

Note merely that $B_t=B_s+(B_t-B_s)$ which is the sum of independent normally distributed random variables. In particular, $B_s$ is $\mathbb{F}_s$-measurable and $B_{t-s}$ is independent of $\mathbb{F}_s$. Thus, \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}_s[Z_t] &= \mathbb{E}_s\left[\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2t+\theta B_t\right)\right] \\ &= \mathbb{E}_s\left[\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2t+\theta B_s+\theta B_{t-s}\right)\right] \\ &= \exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2s\right)\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2(t-s)\right)\cdot\mathbb{E}_s\left[\exp\left(\theta B_s+\theta B_{t-s}\right)\right]\\ &= \exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2s\right)\cdot\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2(t-s)\right)\cdot\exp\left(\theta B_s\right)\cdot\mathbb{E}\left[\exp\left(\theta B_{t-s}\right)\right]\\ &= Z_s\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2(t-s)\right)\cdot\exp\left(\frac{1}{2}\theta^2 \mathrm{Var}[B_{t-s}]\right) \\ &= Z_s\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2(t-s)+\frac{1}{2}\theta^2 (t-s)\right) \\ &= Z_s. \end{align*}

And you're done and have shown that $(Z_t)$ is a martingale (with respect to the natural filtration of the Brownian motion).

You don't need to integrate the normal density. That's just tedious. You should first decompose the Brownian motion as mentioned in the beginning. The $-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2t$ can be split up similarly and pulled out of the expectation as it is non-random. Then, you can use measurability and independence (two key properties of the conditional expectation) to pull out $B_s$ and reduce the conditional expectation of $B_{t-s}$ to a simple expectation. Then, note that $B_{t-s}\sim N(0,t-s)$ and that $\mathbb{E}\left[e^{m+sZ}\right]=e^{m+0.5s^2}$ - a useful formula to keep in mind.

Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)

This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.